The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case without erroneous determination of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant and the defense counsel at the lower court alleged that they were not significantly different from the grounds for appeal of this case at the lower court, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in light of the Defendant’s partial statement, witness E’s legal statement, and the list of 112 reported cases, considering the following factors: (a) the witness’s attitude to make statements, consistency in statements, and consistency with the circumstances.

In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure, the credibility of the statement should be assessed in consideration of all the circumstances that are difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, including the appearance, attitude, and penology of a witness who is being sworn in the presence of a judge, and the penology of a witness who is sworn in the open court after being sworn in the presence of a judge, and the appearance and attitude of a witness, and the penology of a statement.

On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle, so it has an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be considered one of the most important elements in determining credibility of the statement can not be reflected in the evaluation of credibility.

In light of the above substantial spirit of the principle of direct examination, the first instance court as above.